The Sun. — London, England, 1836-06-14 00:00:00

~~ in trheonecoounss.ideHractiobeijevteltitisthsuobsjeecetrrhoards b ee n in many r list the espects cr he returns, an t la had arisen from the fact of- several d offic t er t s th h e a y v employed to make out t i ti g a d b e n e o n t e hear .) t e i a g r a . t ) i o n s H ew had, hich all followed the same principle( had been entrusted to them.- ' h ltd hteveeertthe satisfach. Con in saying ne t a h rt a h t e , h e s ia o nrv iar , as t cy re a e to the laid ( which from the Returns b li e e fer e traheaidreLoorndsahipfosr,lntehre occasion be had then drawn from Id affect the conclusions • themselves were correct , and that, therefore, no error in the he R e t much arns t re them.at Returns WOO There was, however, one e r rro f r ro n m , hi t c h h e 4• appear in 183 , whereas, in gretted, inasmucahrraesarit euf'oualpdpeaaplp there was point of facta,lt'here was little or no arrear at that time. The orrected, would show that the result of the Return, exertions of his Noble and Learned Friend, h had still to lament, was not to reduce the unparalleleddnect whose absence e arrears, whereas, a i e n . point of fact, he had reduced them to no thing, or ne ar Their Lordships would recollect that on former occasion he drew their attention to the business of the rof Chancery at several different and distant periods. C ourt Ile c alled their attention to the state of Chancery business as existed immediately after Lord Hardwicke ceased to be it also as it existed in 1813, being the Chancellor ; a periboedd when the Vice-Chancellor's Court was este w also as it existed in 1823, because in that blis r the'ir Lordships inquired into the whole matter of the yea arrears of business both in this House and in the Court of Chancery, and on which occasion a Select Committee „ n i m ade n Report containing very material and important evi dence - upon the subject be was now discussing ; and lastly, be c alled his attention to the state of bus iness terminating with the year 1835. He took the early period_ b a y going back s eventy years, in order that their Lordships mi g ht form °me estimate of the manner in which the business of the Court Chancery had increased. The average of causes from 1661 to f 65 was only 441, whereas from 1831 to 1835 they amou nted to 1,283. From 1661 to 1665 the average number aril f titions was 379, whereas from 1831 to 1835 they o n ," Ac ted ti to 2,813. The appeals from the then only Court nii:Court of the Master nf the Rolls-from 1661 to 1665 are d only 12, whereas from 1831 to 1835 they amounted to r a ss e le e did not state this as being a necessary argument in b 5. o re of the proposition he had to submit to their Lordships ; but non b" I " • order to correct a misconception which had gone abro a d u pon the subject-a misconception difficult to rain beex- but which, upon reference to figures, was shown to se • bout any foundation whatever. However, the im it eriods to which he was anxious to call their Lord .,,,ortant p r ies , atteetion, were the periods of 1813, 1823, and 1835, e from these it was that their Lordships must form b eca- ; s • as to whether the present powers of the Court of an op.nion and the appellate business of their Lordships' t i o use, andClianccrY of the Privy Council, were to continue as they ‘ „,, se , or whether it was not the bounden duty of the Legisla ture to apply such r emed y a s was necessary in order to dis pose of the arrears of business that at present existed, and mus t c ontinue to exist unless some remedy were ap plied. CU /11 18 13, Parliament decid e d by pass i ng t h e Bill f or the appoi ntme nt of a Vice-Chan ce ll or , t h at t h e strengt h o f he C o urt a t that time was not adequate to perform the du 'ties req uired. He would now compare what was the state of business at that time with the state of business at present, and b e thought that their Lordships could not but come to the lusion , that if the busines s , as i t ex i ste d i n 1813, ca ll ed cone a ppointment of an additional Judge, the enormous in th e fo r l l ase o f business since that period was such as made it abso iy i m possible for the machinery, as fixed by the Vice late ellor's Bill to carry on the business of the Court of „ Than e_ Chancery,, in a manner to do justi ce t o th e numerous su i tors in t h a t Court. The Noble and L earne d L ar d t h en rea d t h e following statement .-1810, 181], and 1812, average number o f causes set down for bearing, 540 ; 1820, 1821, and 1822, ditto, 945 ; 1832, 1833, and 1834, ditto, 1,301. That formed aii impor tant part of the business of the C o u r t, b u t b y no means const i t uted the whole. The next subject was petitions-- 1 810, 1811, and 1812, the average number of petitions was 9 0 ; e 1820, 1821, and 1822, ditto, 1,487 ; 1832, 1833, an d 1 03 4, ditto, 2,817. A similar incacase had taken place in appe als from the other branches of the Court of Chancery to .th e Lord Chancellor. 1810, 1811, and 1812, the average 'um b e r of appeals was 16 ; 1820, 1821, and 1822, ditt o , 42 ; 1832, 1833, and 1834, ditto, 55. That there should be an increase of appeals after the creation of the Vice Chancellor's Court was an inevitable consequence. It was prophesied by S i r Samuel Roinilly, that the effect of passing that measure would be to make the Lord Chancellor a judge of appeal on l y ; and he would cease to be a judge in original causes. With some trifling exceptions, that prophecy had been ful oed; and from that time it might be truly said, that the business of the Lord Chancellor in the Court of Chancery, ba d been to review the judgments pronounced in the two other branches of the Court. It was not upon appeals and petitions on ly that the Chancellor was engaged, and which consti tuted a large proportion of the business of the Court of ‘rban eery ; but another important part of his duty was the i ' lear i n g, of motions. It was well known that some most int natant questions that arose between suitors in the Court of Chancery, were discussed and decided upon motions.. It was e vade a matter of complaint in Lords Eldon's time,• that the parties arranged among themselves, or so managed their plead ings, as to bring the real merits of the question before the Court upon motion. It was an extremely inconvenient mode o f proceeding, and one not calculated to promote the interest o f the suitor ; but parties who had great and important in terests at stake, if they could not have the doors of the Court open to them upon the hearing of, the cause, would naturally adopt any course to obtain a judicial opinion, by which their r ights were to be regulated. On a former occasion he also ca ll e d their Lordships' attention to a most striking result of an i n quirS , as to the state of the funds in the hands of the Ac countant -General of the Court of Chancery. In the year 1812 it appeared that the money standing in the name of the Accountant -General was 28,137,000/. ; and that that money stood to the account of 6.266 causes. It appeared that the su m in the hands of the Accountant-General, up to the pre sent period, was 39,780,0001., and that that money stood to the account of 10,227 causes. But was all this money l o cked up awaiting the decision of the Court ? Not so. The money so locked up, constituted but a very small part o f this enormous sum. By far the greater part of it was money from which the suitors derived great and unmixed b ene fit. Sometimes from necessity, sometimes from choice, parties had resorted to the Court of Chancery for a secu rity of their money, and for a due administration of the funds. This was done in cases of infancy, in cases of persons labouring under disabilities, and in those various and com plicated cases affecting individuals or families, in which those acting for them thought it expedient to put the adminis tration of affairs under the direction of the Court of Chancery. The machinery of the Bill which constituted the Accountant- General's office was so perfect, the system of the office was so s ecure, that persons so situated could not possibly possess a place of deposit more perfectly free from danger. Although a s mall portion of this money was matter of contest, still the increase of this fund showed to what extent that particular branch of the business which gave rise to this fund had in creased -great as had been the increase of business in the Court o f Chancery, he believed that if the Court were put upon a footing which would insure to the suitors a speedy determination o f their suits, there would be a much greater resort to it. Par ties who had rights to establish and objections to enforce were deterred from coming to the Court, and either compromised their suits or abandoned their rights altogether, not because they thought the ultimate result would be against them but because t he vexation they would have to experience ere the question was brought to a judicial decision induced them to compromise or a bandon their rights rather than encounter such evils. When the Vice-Chancellor's Bill passed, it was supposed that great facilities would be given to the administration of justice in Chancery, and their Lordships would find, on a reference to figures, that the hope of such a result brought a g reat number of new suitors into the Court. He had already stated that the average number of causes in the Court of Chancery for the three years previous to the passing of the -vi c e-Chancellor's Bill was 540, and that the average for the three succeeding years was 717. But the increase of the num ber of bills filed in Chancery was still more striking. On referring to the returns, he found that the average number o f Bills filed in the Court of Chancery in the five years pre ceding the establishment of the Vice-Chancellor's Court was 1,830; in the five succeeding years 2,236, and in the last year 2,56'4. This great increase in the business of the Court was eu ainly to be attributed to the removal of that dread of delay w hi c h had existed previous to the passing of the Vice-Chan elebellor'a Bill. So much then for the period of 1813. In 1823, s m e s eiihqtanding that the Vice- Chancellor's Bill had then been en operation for ten years, it was found that there was such san accumulation in the judicial business of that House, that -their Lordships appointed a Select Committee to inquire into the cause of it, and, if possible, to devise a remedy. It ap peared from the report of the Committee so appointed, that there was at that time an arrear of five years of appeals. That was to say, that an appellant or a respondent who had been under the necessity of resorting to their Lordships for the redress of a supposed erroneous decision in one of the branches of the Court of Chancery, bad, after presenting the a ppeal, to wait five years before his case could possibly be beard. It was no wonder that such a state of things should induce their Lordships to institute an investigation with the view of discovering the cause of this arrear, and, if possible, of devising a remedy for it. What was the result of •the in quiry ? The Select Committee stated in their report, " there is now a manifest impossibility that any person holding the Great Seal can find the time required for the business of the Court of Chancery and of the House of Lords, and for all the other great and arduous duties which are attached to his high office." The fact was, that since the passing of the Vice-Chancellor's Bill these duties of the Lord Chancellor bad not only been not diminished, but had greatly increased in consequence of the vast influx of additional suitors, which the hope of a speedier administration of justice had brought into the Court of Chancery. What was the remedy sug gested by their Lordships' committee in 1823, and subse quently adopted by the House ? It was in a great measure a temporary expedient, and one which, although justified by the great pressure of the arrears then before the House, was one which he (the Lord Chtncellor) thought they would be slow to adopt as a permanent plan. The plan 'recommended and adopted was that in the highest appellate court in the king dom, namely, in that House, the highest officer of the law should not preside, but that others should be selected for the purpose of performing those duties which undoubtedly ought only to be discharged oy the highest legal officer appointed under the Crown. He did not mean to say that the indivi duals selected on that occasion, and who afterwards devoted so much of their time to the administration of justice in that House, were not as well qualified to perform the new duties imposed upon them as any men could possibly be. But be contended that it was not becoming or fit, that in the highest court of appellate jurisdiction, the individual presiding should be any other than the highest judicial officer under the Crown. Great assistance was undoubtedly derived from the exertions of the individuals who were selected in 1823. Their wo e uld ta a sk ll , r a m e r h e e a w t aLordbo our Giff he ord d e h r a n d e h applied . Lor himself dship tos th siding in that H ou se from ten till four in the mornin g , an d n m d e the be r g in the Rolls C our t f ro m six to tenin the evening —this was a more than any human being ought degree of exert i on grea tly mind c ou ld b ear , o r any human strength sustain. B ecau se to be call e d upon t o perform—greatly more than any human their L or d s hip s must remember , that he severe as a J u d ge ' s la bour mi g ht be while Court, his d u ti es by no sat in open meons ceased when he left the bench. A great and i m p or t an t part of the duties of a Jud g e was to delibera te on the argu ments he had heard advanced by counsel in Court, to investi gate the authorities quoted, and, as far as possible, to make himself master of all the facts of the case brought forward for his decision. If a judge were called upon to sit from ten in the morning till ten at night, it was perfectly impossible that he could have any time left for the discharge of these import ant duties. Such, however, was the expedient to which the House resorted in 1823. It in a great degree answered the purpose for which it was intended, because the House was then enabled to sit every day in its judicial capacity, or at least to sit five days a week, the Lord Chancellor pre siding on three days, and the Lord Speaker (as he was called) on two. The result was, that after the lapse of a certain length of time the assistance of the additional judges was not so largely called for, and not so freely used ; and although from the year 1823 down to 1835, there had been no one case in which some assistance had not been afforded to the officer holding the Great Seal in the adminis tration of the appellate jurisdiction of that House, of late years that assistance had become comparatively small, and at no period had it been so great as in the time of Lord Gifford, Of arrears in that House there were now com paratively none, and their reduction might in a great degree be attributed to the assistance which their Lordships had de rived from two Noble and Learned Lords who had no other judicial functions to perform—wh o were therefore enabled to defote the whole or a great part of their time to the judicial business of the House, and who, by devoting so much of their time to that business, had conferred a great benefit upon the public. It was owing to the exertions of those Noble and Learned Lords (one of whom be saw present) that the arrears were at this moment so much reduced. Could any fact more strongly prove the propriety of the suggestion he took the liberty of making to their Lordships? How was it that the arrears had been so much subdued? Was it riot be cause there happened to be in the House Noble and Learned Lords not attached to any other Court, and who conse quently had it in their power to devote the whole of their time to the judicial business of that House ? As far, then, as that House was concerned, he considered that the experiment embodied in the present Bill had been fairly tried. Having by a statement of figures shown the state of business in that House at the two periods to which he had directed their Lord ships' attention, he would now shortly state what was the arrear of business in the Court of Chancery. Here, again, he had the satisfaction of stating that the exertions of those who had preceded him had been such as completely to subdue the arrear which, during the previous thirty years of his experience, he had known to exist in the Court of Chancery. Of appeals from the other branches of the Court of Chancery pending before the Lord Chancellor there were now none ; because, from the return made up to the last day of last Michaelmas Term, there then appeared to be only nine cases in arrcar, and he had the satisfaction to state, that the case which he heard on Saturday last, was within three of the end of the list brought forward at the commencement of the last Term. Of the business, therefore, at present pending before the Lord Chancellor, it might be said that there was no arrear. He stated this fact to enable their Lordships to come to this con clusion—that if there were a judge whose sole duty should be to attend to the Court of Chancery, that judge would not only be able to dispose of all the appellate cases that could be brought before him, but would also have it in his power to devote a large portion of his time to the hearing of original business, which now, and ever since the year 1813, had been exclusively heard by the other branches of the Court. Of original causes in Chancery, now in ai-rear, ready for hear ing, and waiting to be heard, there were between 700 and 800--and, looking at the average number of causes deter mined, and the average number of causes set down for hearing, it was obvious that this arrear must go on increasing, unless some step were taken to prevent it.--( Hear, hear.) During the last three years, the average number of original causes heard and determined was 1,158; the average number of causes set down for hearing within the same period was 1,340. So that with an existing arrcar of 700 causes, their Lordships had this additional fact before them, that the ave rage number of causes heard for the last three years had fallen very considerably short of the number set down for hearing. Did not this state of things. in the Court of Chan cery require some remedy ? Why should they deny to the suitors in that Court the right of having their causes heard without delay ? If the arrear had arisen from the temporary illness of the Judge, or from any other accidental cause, the case would be different; but when it was found, from the general business of the Court, that there was no proba bility of subduing the arrear, he was sure their Lordships would agree with him in thinking that this was a state of things which ought not to be allowed to continue. But the Bill which he had the honour to introduce to your Lord ships' notice was not limited to the business of that House, or of the Court of Chancery. It related to another and a most important branch of the judicial business of the country which was transacted before the Privy Council. From the colonies appeals lay, and lay only, to the Privy Council. Their Lordships must be aware that within a very short time, great and important alterations had taken place in the law, and that important duties were now imposed upon the Privy Council, which formerly had been performed by other branches of the judicature. Their Lordships were aware that the Court of Delegates no longer existed, and that the whole of its duties, together with those of the Vice-Ad miralty Court, bad been transferred to the Privy Council. Thus the Privy Council had of late years become a most im portant court of judicial proceedings —a Court where the ulti mate rights of many parties were now finally adjudicated. The want of professional aid in the Privy Council was felt when Parliament passed the Bill imposing all these additional duties upon it, and with the view of remedying the deficiency, that which was called the Judicial Committee was established, and a great improvement it certainly turned out to be. But the parties of whom this Committee was formed were Judges of other Courts, having other important judicial functions to perform, and a great deal of arrangement was necessary—out of which, of course, great delay originated—to enable all these parties to assemble at the same time, for the pnrpose of hear ins, the causes which mi g ht b e b roug h t b e f ore t h e P r i vy Coun cil,' and upon which their judgment was required. [Here the Noble and Learned Lord gave an instance of recent oc currence.] But the great object he had in view, and that which he was satisfied was most important, not only to a due administration of justice in the Privy Council, but that with out which no Court could properly and adequately perform its judicial duties, was, that there should be some one person who, from professional habits and knowledge of the law, was proper to take the lead. At present the Lord President of the Council was not necessarily a lawyer, and as far as the ordinary duties of the office were concerned, it was not requisite that he should be a lawyer ; but when he had to preside over impor tant judicial investigations, it was, he thought, absolutely and positively necessary that the person so presiding should have not only a competent knowledge of the law, but that he should be a person who had attained to high eminence in the pro fession. And when their Lordships considered the nature of the appeals which were now likely to be made from the colonies to the Privy Council, they would see, lie was sure, that nothing ought to be omitted or spared that could possibly give weight and propriety to its decisions. With that view he thought that the highest judicial officer under the Crown ought to pre side in the Privy Council as well as in that House. Where could their Lordships place the highest judicial officer ex cept in those courts from whose decision there was no appeal? From the decision of the Privy Council there was no appeal any more than there was from the decision of that House. In the Privy Council, then, as well as in that House, the Lord Chancellor ought to preside. If their Lordships adopted that view of the case—if they were desirous that there should be no arrcar of business in that House—if they were desirous that there should be no arrear of business in the Privy Council—if they were desirous that the highest officer of the law should preside in causes now pending, and hereafter to be brought in the Privy Council as well as in that House, it was obvious that the only course they could adopt was to make the Lord Chancellor for the time be ing President over all judicial matters brought before those two tribunals. But it would be impossible that the Lord Chancellor could perform these duties unless he were re lieved from those which he was at present called upon to perform in the Court of Chancery. In the Court of Chan cery at the present moment, the great difficulty was to find time for the hearing of original causes. After entering at considerable detail into difficulties at present existing on this point, the Noble and Learned Lord proceeded to say, that what lie suggested was to appoint a third equity judge to pre side in the Court of Chancery alone, leaving to the Lord Chancellor for the time being the appellate jurisdiction in the House of Lords in the Privy Council. The Noble and Learned Lord next combated the suggestion which had been made to abolish all intermediate appeals from the inferior to the superior Courts of Chancery, and to direct all appeals to be made at once to that House. This would be to burden the suitors with mach heavier expenses, whilst it would give no corresponding advantage to any party. To show that his plan was not without a precedent, the Noble and Learned Lord quoted the statute 14th Edward 111., by which one judge, two earls, and four barons were appointed during the period that Parliament was not sitting to hear and determine any appeals that might be brought before them. The Noble and Learned Lord then went on to contend that there could be no constitutional objection to the House sitting for the dis charge of judicial business during the prorogation of Parlia ment. Lord LYNDHURST could not give his consent to the measure now introduced. ( Here the Noble and Learned Lord entered into a statement to show under the proposed Bill the office of Chancellor would be degraded, and how in significant its duties would become, how much its emoluments would be reduced, and how difficult it would therefore be to find any lawyer of eminence to undertake it.) Of the result who could doubt ? The appellate judge would soon become inferior to the judge from whose decision an appeal was brought before him. What would the profession, what would suitors think, of a Lord Chancellor so circumstanced? There would be another evil which the public and the profession would consider almost as great as that to which he had al luded. Let their Lordships look at the position of their own House. In their judicial station they had the high character to maintain which they had long maintained, and which he trusted they would long maintain. It was of the utmost im portance to that House that it shculd remain in fact as well as in name, the highest judicial tribunal in the country. Now that must always materially depend on the talent .and know ledge of the Lord Chancellor, and on the confidence reposed in him by the profession and the epnntry. If the Lord Chan cellor fell in public estimation, their Lordships' would fall with him. They would lose the character which, be thanked God, they still possessed. And, further, what would be the neevitable tendency of this change? In the Bill itself that tendency was foreseen and provided for. The Lord Chancel lor was, when necessary, to have the assistance of the Master of the Rolls, •the Vice-Chancellor, or a Judge of one of the Common Law Courts. Now, what would happen? The at tendance of any of those persons, at first occasional, would soon become habitual ; the office of Lord Chancellor would soon sink in public estimation, and an office formerly judicial, would become almost entirely political. So much for the evils which would result from the proposed measure, which was . not only vici ous i n its principle, but inefficient with reference to its object. By the Bill the House was to be enabled, un der a proclamation from the Crown, to sit to hear appeals after a prorogation. If the Lord Chancellor had the power to hear appeals, notwithstanding a prorogation, and after a pro rogation, what would be the consequence ? That during th e Session, he would be engaged more actively as a politician and a legislator ; while his judicial duties would be relaxed. He (Lord Lyndhurst) had taken pains to ascertain from the returns the quantity of judicial business transacted in that House, and the time occupied in transacting it, and he found that the statements made respecting it were enormous exag gerations. In the course of 14 years, 1,078 wr i ts o f error and appeals had been entered in that House. Divide that number by fourteen, and it gave an average of seventy-six in the year. Experience had taught him that about a fifth of the number entered were withdrawn or compromised.—(Hear.) That left the annual average number sixty-two. What was the average time occupied in hearing an appeal in that House ? Reference might be had to the time occupied by the last appeal heard, and still hearing in the House ; but that was a case singular in its circumstances. In fourteen years, the House of Lords sat 836 days, and had decided 745 ap peals, being not much less than one a day. The 62 appeals, therefore, to which he had adverted, might be disposed of in 63 or 64 days. At any rate, 70 days (he admitted that they would be days of hard labour) would be sufficient for the pur pose. Now that formed but a small part of the year. There were usually about 120 judicial days in a session. Two-thirds only of that time would be necessary for the purpose. When Lord Eldon sat in that House as Lord Chancellor, and Lord Gifford as Deputy Speaker, in 1824, sitting only five days in the week, in 84 days, ninety cases were disposed of. In two years, they not only got through the current business, but dis posed of an arrear of 212 causes. No argument could be urged against such a feet. It was clear that what was pro posed by his Noble and Learned Friend was absolutely unne cessary. But it was by no means a new proposition. It had been before !the country for near a century. All statesmen and all lawyers, however, had pronounced but one opinion upon it—a condemnatory one. Lord Hardwicke bad reprobated it. In a speech of Mr. Pitt's edited by Lord Redesdale, Mr. Pitt had warmly condemned it.—(The Noble and Learned Lord here read an extract from the speech in question.) Sir Samuel Romilly had also declared the same opinion ; not in a speech, but in a pamphlet.---[The Noble and Learned Lord here read an extract from the pamphlet in question, in which Sir S. Romilly maintained that it was highly necessary that the legal knowledge of the Lord Chancellor should be re freshed, by his being daily employed in the administration of justice in a subordinate Court.] All these great authorities concurred in opposing the separation of the duties of Lord Chancellor in the Court of Chancery, from his duties as the head of .the appellate jurisdiction in that House. In a debate in the House of Commons on the subject, the late Master- of the Rolls, a consummate Equity Judge, expressed the same opinion. The Noble and Learned and Venerable Earl who had for so many years graced the situation now held by hi s Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack, entertained similar opinions. There was another authority, that of a Noble and Learned Friend of his, for whom he (Lord Lynd hurst) entertained the highest possible respect, and whose absence from that House, and the cause of it, every one must lament. In 1830, that Noble and Learned Lord, then in the House of Commons, pronounced an opinion on the subject so exactly in accordance with his (Lord Lyndhurst's) and couched in such pointed and characteristic language, that, with their Lordships' leave, he would read a passage from it :—" If the Lord Chancellor's duties were confined to sitting in the House of Lords, he would soon becom e a mere Judge of Appeal—he would soon cease to be what the Constitution prescribed be ought to be—the first lawyer in the country—filling the first situation in that Court of which he ought to be the ornament. Even a s a judge of appeal, they might set him up, and plant him on the woolsack ; they might give him power ; but would he have any authority ? Would he satisfy the courts below ? Would he satify the suitors ? Would he satisfy the profession ? See the course which would then be taken in the appointment of a Lord Chancellor. He would be chosen because he was a cunning intriguer behind the durtain—because he was a skil ful debater in the House of Lords. Would such a man be qualified to decide appeals from the Vice-Chancellor, from the Master of the Rolls, or from any other judge whatever? Would he be qualified to grapple with the difficulties of a complicated case ? Would he hare any confidence in him self ? Certainly not ; because he would well know that the profession had no confidence in, him. Such a Lord Chan cellor, he would engage to say, would confirm at least nine teen out of twenty appeals that came before him. That which ought to be the resort of suitors, the comptroller of judges, and the security of right, the power of the appellate jurisdiction, would exist only in name." Such were his (Lord Lyndhurst's) authorities ; and he invited his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack to cite one contradictory testimony of value. When the Noble Lords opposite, or the party with which they were connected, came into office, which was in 1830, it was after loudly reproaching their predeces sors for not amending th e pr o c e edi ngs i n th e Court of Chan cery, and the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords. (Cries of " Hear.") That reproach involved the strongest implied pledge upon the subject on their part. How had that pledge been redeemed ? He repeated, -that of the Noble and Learned Lorned who at that period occupied the Woolsack, he wished to speak with every possible respect. That Noble and Learned Lord had disposed of more appeals in a given time than any judge who had preceded him ; and of his efforts at that period he was now unfortunately suffering the conse quences. He begged, therefore, to be understood as alluding solely to the legislatiee and not to the judicial proceedings of the party to whom he alluded. It was true they had brought in a Bill for reforming ministerial offices in the Court of Chancery ; but of whatever good that measure might have been productive, it had nothing to do with the judicial office. In 1833 their first measure on that subject made its ap pearance. The Bill was laid on the table and printed, but it never got into circulation ; and it was only by accident that he (Lord Lyndh urs t) h a d obtained a copy. Its object was to establish an appellate tribunal of so strange a character, that no person but one, who was a fit subject for one of the pe culiar acts of jurisdiction of the Lord Chancellor—(A laugh) —would ever think of bringing a cause before it. For that tri bunal was so constituted, that if the appellant succeeded, the case might be carried before another tribunal, whereas if he failed, the failure was final. In 1834 another Bill on the subject was read a first time and printed. In that Bill a scheme was most ingeniously contrived for transferring the appellate jurisdic tien of the House of Lords to another tribunal; the judicial committee of the Privy Council, with one of those Chelsea pensioners (for so he might call them, being one of the body himself) the ex-chancellors, to preside over it. That plan, however, was abandoned. And now came the measure under consideration ; a measure which had been before the profes sion and the public for seventy years, and which had been universally and invariably condemned. Such was the manner in which, the Noble Lords opposite had redeemed their pledge. In 1830 their Lordships bad passed a Bill for making an addititional judge in the Court of Equity. In the House of Commons that Bill was very roughly handled. It was not treated with the courtesy which might have been expected from an unreformed house.—(A laugh.) He was decidedly of opinion that an addition ought to be made to the Court of Chancery. But there ought to be no exaggeration. There certainly bad been a great in crease in the business of the Court of Chancery.—[The Noble Lord here entered into details, the object of which was to show that in the last sixty years the business of the Court of Chancery had more than doubled]. But then his Noble and Learned Friend should recollect that during the period the strength of the Court of Chancery had been more than doubled. When lie (Lord Lyndhurst) had the honour to be Master of the Rolls the siftings in that Court were only in the evening, and amounted only to twelve hours in the week. His successor established morning sittings, and sat thirty hours in the week ; it being also to be takn into the account that an hour in the morning was 'generally more effective than an hour after dinner.—(A laugh.) Then there was the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor, who divided the whole business of the Court. He (Lord Lyndhurst) would say without hesitation, that the addition of a judge to the Court of Chancery was highly desirable, but that the Lord Chan_ cellor should not be removed from the Court. The Noble and Learned Lord thought that the-Court of Review was unnecessary. After entering into some details, the Noble and Learned Lord (Lord Lyndhurst) admitted that he thought that Court might ultimately be extinguished, and its jurisdiction transferred to other judges. As to the appellate jurisdiction in that House, he (Lord Lyndhurst) should suggest no further alteration than this—objection had frequently been made to appeals from a judge sitting in the Court of Chancery to the same judge sitting in that House. That objection was not entirely founded in fact. He should not, however, object to a regulation by which the Lord Chancellor, when sitting in that house on appeals, should have two other judges sitting with him. The oble and Learned Lord "( Lad Lyndhurst) proceeded to allude to the judicial Committee of the Privy Council.. He believed that was a tribunal which gave great satisfaction, and what he proposed with respect to it was, that instead of the Chancellor, one of the judges of the equity courts should preside in it, and he thought that the same individual should al ways fulfil the duties ,of that office, for the plain and obvious reason which his Noble Friend had himself alluded to—namely, the nature of the subjects which arc brought under its investi gation. This was his plan. The object, at least the prin cipal object of his Noble Friend's Bill was to divide the office of Chancellor, and to separate the judicial from the po litical functions. He objected to that principle for the rea sons he had stated, and on the authorities which he had cited in support of that opinion. He could not, therefore, give his assent to the second reading of his Noble Friend's Bill. If his Noble and Learned Friend would frame a Bill on those principles which he had taken the liberty of stating to their Lordships—not taking into account details, for with respect to those he should be found most feasible—he would give it his ready, warm, and cordial support. He had stated his reasons for opposing the second reading of this Bill. It was for their Lordships to say whether they were sufficient to ituluce them to agree to the amendment which he submitted, that the Bill be-aead a second time that day six months.—( Cheers.) Lord LANGDALE said his Noble and learned' Friend ;Lord Lyndhurst) set out with stating that it was his inten• THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 1836. tion not to consider the question in a party light, and it was not to be wondered at'if, notwithstanding that declaration, he after wards swerved fron his resolution, when it was recollected that his Noble and Learned Friend's own propositions, on a former occasion, were treated merely as a party question.—.. (Hear,. hear.) Th e returns laid on their Lordships' table furnished grounds, no doubt, for the most important conside ration. The results to be derived from them, he should en deavour to treat of somewhat in detail. There was one great and material point which was, he might say, universally ad mitted. The source of the evil did not appear to him (and in saying this he spoke it with every respect) to be per ceived by his Noble and Learned Friend who had last ad dressed their Lordships. He could hardly imagine that his Noble a n d Learned Friend did not perceive the source of the evil ; but the fact was, that it did not fall in with his views to state the peculiar circumstances which created it to their Lordships. It appeared to him, after great and long consi deration of this subject, now continued 'for many years, that the great evil which had been already dweit upon of their being unable to consider any thing that related to the Court of Chancery, unless with the admixture of party zeal and spirit, arose from this circumstance, that the highest judicial officer of the Crown was also the highest political officer in the kingdom. It was only necessary, in consideration of this question, to look at the nature of the duties imposed on the Lord Chancellor, to come to the conclusion that it was impos sible for any one man satisfactorily to perform them. The du ties of Chancellor were twofold—partly judicial and partly po litical. The judicial duties were again subdivided into two br anches —namely, his original and appellate jurisdiction. He was judge of appeals in his own Court, where he decided cases sent up for his decision from the Master of the Rolls and the Vi ce -Ch ance ll or. And as a judge of appeals in that House, his pre sence was considered almost necessary, though there were some occasions in which it bad been dispensed with. Th e Ch ance ll or had, besides, as Keeper of the Great Seal, the most important political functions to.perform—more important than any other officer of the Crown As Keeper of the G reat S ea l , h e was the King's principal adviser in matters of law. He was the person properly charged with the duty of watching the alterations effected in the law by the Bills which passed through Parliament. He was, in fact, the person to whom both Houses of Parliament had to look for the proper superintendence over those altera tions in the law which were submitted from time to time for the consideration of Parliament. If the duty which he had last mentioned were properly and efficiently discharged, or ra ther, if it were possible fur the Chancellor to fulfil all the du ties imposed on him, they would not hear those observations on the acts of the Legislature to which they were daily and hourly exposed in all the courts of the country.—(Hear, hear, from Lord Lyndhurst). The Chancellor was also the Minister of the Crown, to whom belonged the superintendence of the different courts of justice. As to a great portion of his political duties, some were not performed at all, and others were thrown upon some different public officer. What, then, was the result of the system by Which so many duties were imposed upon one man that it was impossible to perform ? It was this, that all the duties were imperfectly performed.— ( Hear, hear.) These being the results of the present sys tem, let us see how they affected the different situations to which they referred. It was admitted that there . was a want of judicial power in the Court of Chancery. The delay of the administration of justice in that. House was also a subject not to be considered lightly. His Noble and Learned Friend had said that the House easily managed to get rid of the business before it. , The paper el the close of each session furnished the best refutation to. that. assertion. Now with respect to the political duties of the Chancellor, and the consequences which resulted from their neglect, their Lordships would observe that every one must admit, that the first duty of a Government was to provide for the due admi nistration of justice, which was in fact the life blood of a ci vilized community.—( Hear, hear.) The administration of justice was in its popular sense of a wider import ; but in its practical application it depended upon the law ; and therefore, when the Government was providing for the due administra tion of justice, it did not fully answer that object without tak ing care that the law was the best which could be provided. How clearly was the want of some superintending authority exemplified in the present state of the law. There bad been various commissions appointed. There was the common law commission, there was a commission to inquire into the ecclesiastical courts, and there was a commission now sitting on the criminal . law. These commi ss ion ers bad paid the grea t e st diligence and attention to the subjects submitted to them, and had made a variety of most useful and valuable sug gestions, which, though they produced some fruits to the country, yet had, to a large extent, lain dormant for the want of some person who should have the leisure, talent, and autho rity to see how far the means taken by various commissioners, appointed for different purposes, and propounding different views, might be reconciled and adjusted and carried into ope ration.—( Hear, hear.) He had spoken of the ill consequence which had resulted from delay in conducting the business, of the Court of Chancery. There was no doubt but delay begat delay. By delay was caused supplementary facts, the de cease of parties, the property changing hands and these being the consequences of delay, became themselves the causes of fresh delay and expense, which tended to close altogether the door of justice. He was perfectly willing to acknowledge that great delay was caused often by the parties themselves, which was in no way imputable to the Court ; and often by the na ture of the circumstances which it was necessary to investigate. And he must say that the delay in those cases which were made the subject of declamation against the Court of Chan cery, was not attributable to the Court. These causes were relied upon, in order to induce a belief that to be swift in the dispatch of causes, was the main duty of a judge, and was of itself sufficient to constitute a judge. There could not be a greater or more dangerous misapprehension. ( Hear, Hear, hear.) A judge had no right to hurry. There might be cases, and probably there had been cases, in which it would be more excusable to put an end by a rash judgment to the sufferings of a wretched and worn suitor rather than to prolong his sufferings; but it g enerally happened that a decision arrived at with undue celerity was not only in itself wrong, but calculated to create general dis trust throughout the community. They wanted a power of appeal, but they did not want two courts of appeal. They did not want an appeal in the shape 'of a re-hearing—that is, when there is an appeal from the Master of the Rolls to the Chancellor, and from the Chancellor to the House of Lords. Lord L YNDHURST said, that is what this Bill does in effect. Lord LANGDALE resumed—Yes, and his Noble and Learned Friend might recollect that was one oF the provisions of which he had disapproved. Now, wit) regard to the divi sion of the political and judicial functions, if there could be any means by which the warm and eager feelings of the mind could be subdued, it was essential to provide them with re ference to such an officer as the judge .of the Court of Chancery. Those who had practised in that Court could not help observing scenes which could little tend to raise the present system in their estimation.— ( Hear.) They. might have seen a man dissolved in tears, and thus manifesting the generosity of his nature, while another was scarcely trying to conceal the excited and angry feelings by which his mind was agitated. (Lord Lyndhurst here made an observation to a Noble Peer near him, which we understood to be, -" I never witnessed that at all events.") —( Laughter). The Noble Lord having referred to the delay caused in the decision of the trial of Lady Hewley's charity, in consequence of the changes of Administration, went on to say that he thought the change which was requisite was this—that there ought to be a Lord Chancellor in the Court of Chancery, appointed by letters patent, without the delivery of the Great Seal. This exempted the Chancellor at once from all political duties, and from all the duties which belonged to the office as a judge of appeal in that House. It appeared to him that the Chancellor should be precluded from rehearing the decisions of the Master of the Rolls or the Vice-Chancellor, but that he should be a judge w holly and entirely of an original jurisdiction. He thought, notwithstanding the appointment Chancellor, tl.e Great Seal should be delivered to a Lord Keeper who should be empowered to attend to the political functions, numerous and important as they were, which now attached to the office of Chancellor, and t he conceived that due provision should be made for the constant, regular, and diligent administration of justice in that House as the Supreme Court of Appeal. —( Hear, hear.) He bad stated shortly and frankly the grounds on which he submitted these alterations to their Lord ships. It would be readily acknowledged by all who had studied the past history of the Court of Chancery, and the in conveniences attendant upon its present mode of proceeding, that the subject was one of great intricacy and difficulty. Various opinions also had been expressed upon the subject, both Lord Liverpool and Lord Eldon having been opposed to the notion of separating the judicial from the political func tions of the Lord Chancellor. He trusted that he had not spoken with undue severity of the condUct of past Lord Chancellors, but had had a fair regard to the peculiar 'circumstances in which they had been successively placed. No man was bound to do what was impossible. He ad mitted that it might have been better if Lord Chancellors for the time being had from time to time applied them selves to remedy the evils of practice which grew up in their Court. At the same time great excuse was to be allowed them if they had not done so to the extent they might have done. The office of Lord Chancellor pos sessed a charm for the mind of the aspirant to its honours which often mislead him from the true course he should pursue in regard to it. The Woolsack was the object of the ambition of every student, to whom it would often appear on act of profanation to do anything which might even threaten to dim the splendour of that high office. He considered that if the judicial and political duties of the Lord Chancellor were to be still united in the same person, that individual could not under any possibility have sufficient time to consider all the cases which would come before him, and, if they could not get a Chancellor who was equal to the exigencies of his office, it were, perhaps, better to have no such office at all. As their Lordships were well aware, that House was now the final Court of Appeal in all cases, and its decision not only bound the case which had been brought before it, but also served as a rule by which all inferior Judges were bound to abide in all cases of a like kind. The Judges of inferior Courts were always anxious and studious to avoid committing error, and they had always this consolation, first in being assisted y an enlightened and experienced Bar, by whom, if they did fall into error, they would most proliably be set right ; and in the second place, in the existence of a Court of Appeal, by which their erroneous judgments might be reversed. But it was not so with their Lordships' Court, in which an error once committed could never be remedied. Their Lordships, therefore, when they came to think of it, would readily admit the immensity of study and of experience which was requisite to enable them ads quately to discharge so important and onerous a charge: and they would agree with him in thinking that if its duties were such as they could not pc :;form with due efficiency themselves,they should lose no time in seeking some other proper agent for the pur- . pose. 'There could not e the least doubt but that the j u d ge 1 in the hest court of ap al should ll i a midi of the highest judicial utation, the sou st judgment, and the most dish Site „ • passionate and unimpeachable integrity and disinterestedness.— . ( Hear.) The supreme judge of appeals should sit in that Ho ise having nothing to do with the Administration, nor any pars of it, nor any political parties in the State. The division • he proposed for the present duties of the Lo rd Chancellor was this: th at t h e Lord Chancellor should ha ve the Court c.,. Chancery, without the Great Seal ; that there should be a Lord-keeper, in whom all the political functions of the Lord Chancellor should be reposed, together with other duties which he believed the. Lord Uhancellor, by virtue of his - office, was expected to attend to, but which he believed no Lord Chancellor had hitherto performed. With respect to appeals, he proposed that there should be a Lord Speaker in judicature, to sit in their Lordship's House, who should hear all cases of appeals, having nothing to do with politics, and be assisted in his labours by certain Lords assistants. He was aware that the Noble and Learned Lord opposite thought it advisable that the person who beard appeals should also hear original questions, on the ground that his judgment and.obser vation were sharpened by the contests between counsel which took place in the courts below. In answer to this, however, it appeared to him that if their Lordships' Judge in appeal were to hear cases of appeal from the three Chancery Courts, and from the Court of Exchequer Chamber, he would have quite enough to occupy his time without attempting to hear original causes also. The objections which he had to the union of the political and judicial duties of the Lord Chan cellor he had already made known to their Lordships. If they did not have a permanent Court and a permanent Judge, they would not adopt the only means that could excite that venera tion towards the Court which it was' desirable should be ex cited. For that reason lie objected to the plan of his Noble and Learned Friend. With regard, to the second reading of the Bill, he begged to observe, that although h e did not ap prove of the plan of his Noble and Learned Friend as a per fect plan, still he could not see that if it were to be adopted, it would be in itself any obstacle whatever towards doing that which he thought ought ultimately to be done. It would be a relief for the present, though not so great a relief as it ought to be. These reasons, therefore, were, he thought, sufficient to justify him in voting for the motionof his Noble and Learned Friend, and in supporting the second reading of the Bill. Lord ABINGE R. expressed his entire concurrence in the views of his Noble and Learned Friend ( Lord Lyndhurst), and declared his intention to support the amendment. He was somewhat surprised, after the many objections which his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Langdale) had made against the Bill, that he should conclude with stating his intention to vote for the second reading. It appeared that his Noble and Learned Friend expected more from human institutions than they were capable of affording. When he complained that the progress of justice was interrupted by the prorogations of Parliament, and that great evils arose from it, he might, in the same way, have complained of the interruption of justiee arising from the illness of a' Judge, or even by his death. Some theorists had gone so far as even to provide against these occurrences. One of the most eloquent and most pro found of theorists had proposed that a Judge should be con stantly sitting to administer justice, hot and hot—(Laugh ter)—as was required. That ingenious gentleman main tained that speedy justice was so essential, that no system of judicature could be perfect unless there was one Judge eternally sitting, so that when one was fatigued, another should take his place.—(Laughter.) That certainly was the very perfection of theory. But human affairs would not admit of its application; he therefore must request his Noble and Learned Friend to mix up with his theory a little more of his experience in practice. He was not disposed to agree with the opinion of his Noble and Learned Friend that it would be desirable to separate the judicial from the political functions of the Lord Chancellor. On the contrary, lie was rather inclined to concur in the opinions delivered by almost all the gentlemen of the profession, that it would be impos sible for a person holding the office of Chancellor apart from the judicial functions, to preserve and give validity to that authority so essential to the decisions of their Lordships' House. What was the grouud of apprehension that the judi cial decisions of a Chancellor would be influenced by his hav ing political duties to discharge ? No case had ever occurred in which the decision of a Chancellor as judge had been sus pected on account of his belonging to a political party in the State.—( Hear, hear.) He believed that ever since the insti tution of the Court of Chancery was known, no such par tiality had been suspected.—( Hear, hear.) He begged to know whether the presence in the Cabinet of the man exer cising the highest judicial functions in the State, did not give to those deliberations a great additional importance and re spect? Besides, it was absolutely necessary that his Majesty's Ministers should possess amongst them a man of high rank and character, capable of being their legal friend and adviser in the Cabinet. It would not bo s considered constitu tional, perhaps, for a Minister of the Crown to receive advice from those who were not connected with his party. The King had on numerous occasions the need of advice and au thority in the law. Now, he must receive that aevice from his Chancellor, and not from anybody else. Therefore his Ma jesty's Ministers were bound to provide for the King a person in whom he might have confidence, and by whom he knew his own safety and honour were fairly and well consulted. For these reasons he should give his cordial support to the amend- Ment of his Noble and Learned Friend. Viscount MELBOURNE said that if the Noble and Learned Lord who had last addressed their Lordships, and particularly his Noble and Learned Friend ( Lord Langdale) with such mastery of all the details, and of all these general and enlarged principles upon which a question like this should be considered, and who had stated to their Lordships many opinions, which, although they were not at present called upon to adopt them, he was sure their Lordships must think they were worthy of deep and serious consideration—if those two Noble and Learned Lords thought it necessary to apologize for addressing the House, how much more did it become him to do so when speaking of a subject upon which he could have no practical knowledge whatsoever ? But having been a party to the bringing forward this Bill, he thought it necessary to state in a few words his reasons for voting for its second reading, and for thinking that their Lordships would do well to send the Bill to a Committee. He bad listened with great attention to the speech of the Noble and Learned Lord(Lynd hurst), in which he stated his objections to the measure pro posed. He (Lord Melbourne) shared in the satisfaction felt by that Noble and Learned Lord, that their Lordships were entirely agreed upon the basis and foundation of this measure —that they were entirely agreed that a great evil was to be corrected, and a great grievance remedied. There was a great accumulation of business in the Court of Chancery, and he agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord when he stated that it was a shame and a disgrace that, in a great coun try like this, there should not be a Court to hear a case when a case was ready for hearing.—(Hear, hear.) But the Noble and Learned Lord objected to the remedy now pro posed to correct that evil. In the first place, he said that if they separated the political from the judicial functions of the Chancellor, and took from him the discharge of cite duties of the latter, the House of Commons would not endow him with sufficient emolument to induce gentlemen at the bar to give up their profession and accept the office. Now he (Lord Melbourne) did not believe there was any authority for such an opinion. On the contrary, he believed that the House of Com mons were too anxious for the adoption of some measure of this kind upon enlarged and enlightened principles, to hesitate for one moment on making a suitable grant for this purpose. The Noble and Learned Lord then stated another objection, pretty much of the same kind. lie said that the situation would be of so precarious a nature, and the remuneration so inadequate, that men of eminence in the profession would not accept the office. Surely the Noble and Learned Lord re membered the circumstances under which Sir Edward Sugden accepted the Chancellorship of Ireland.—(Hear.) If the circumstances under which the late Chancellor of Ireland accepted the Great Seal of Ireland were not sufficient to deter him from that step, he was sure there was no lowering in the political horizon that could deter any future lawyer from doing the same thing on a similar occasion. —(Cheers and laughter.) He ( Lord Melbourne) would not be responsible to their Lordships for much, but lie would be responsible for this, that if it pleased them to constitute this office, there would be no difficulty in finding men of sufficient eminence at the bar perfectly ready to take it. He thought it would not be difficult for any Government whom it might suit, to obtain the services of the Noble and Learned Lord himself, if their Lordships thought proper to constitute the offiee.—( Cheers and laughter.) The Noble and Learned Lord then stated that there was not business enough in their Lordships' House to keep a lawyer in wind—(Laughter)—that he would entirely lose all practice in his profession, and become inferior to those- judges from whom appeals were made to him. That might be so ; but the objection was entirely fanciful and supposititious. It was entirely metaphysical, and altoge ther arguing upon the minds of men. He, for his part, did not believe a single word of it. He did not believe, if a ge neral lawyer, eminent in his profession, sat to hear appeals, not only in equity, not only from Scotland, but from every part of the empire—he did not believe, if such a man, being a master of the general principles of jurisprudence, and being well grounded in his principles, was placed in that situation that by desuetude he would in any respect be wanting in the authority requisite to the due discharge of the duties of his office. The Noble and Learned Lord had quoted a great many speeches which were delivered in the debate in 1813, on the establishment of the Vice-Chancellor's Court. But what was the fact? Now,- he would ask the Noble and Learned Lord whether all the predictions that had been made to-night with respect to the manner in which the character of the Chancellor would be affected by this measure, were not pre dicted upon the Vice-Chancellor's Bill? Lord LYNDHURST—That is not what I stated—what I stated was— Viscount MELBOURNE—No, but I say it. Lord LYNDHURST—The Noble Viscount has asked me a question, and I will answer it. What I said was, that Lord Redesdale and Sir Samuel Romilly were at issue upon the fact. Sir Samuel Romilly said if they passed the Bill they would make the Chancellor merely an appellate judge in the House of Lords. Both agreed that such a result would be pernicious, but they disputed as to the fact. Now the pre sent Bill actually adopted that which was admitted by Lord Redesdale and Sir Samuel Romilly would be pernicious. Viscount MELBOURNE—Did they not state that that would be the consequence of that Bill? Yes, they did. The only prediction made on that occasion which had since been fulfilled was, that the Chancellor would not hear any more original causes. But then the Noble and Learned Lord who spoke last had said that the Chancellor would no longer be chosen on account of his legal eminence, but on account of his being an eloquent and successful debater ; as if being successful in debate had never yet been one of the qualifi cations on account of which a man was selected for that high station. My Lord Eldon was made Solicitor- General because he was successful in debate, and he of course rose up and becamr Lord Chancellor. But be need not mention particular instance ; ut he would say that it was the possession of the qualific - n of being a good debater which placed men upon t ?sack more than any other circumstance. Instances f th .. ii - , \ III w , IP . c,ta. Most undoubtedly, therefore, it would not be a new thing, or a new evil. Then the Noble and Learned Lora said that this proposition had been scouted by every body. He said that it was opposed by Lord Hardwickc, but he produced no authority for that statement. The Court in Lord Hard vvicke's time was perfectly competent for the discharge of the business More it. He also said that it was opposed by Mr_ Pitt, and he quoted the authority of Lord Redesdale iu sup port of that statement. But Lord Redesdale had 310 right quote the authority of Mr. Pitt against this Bill. It was Mere conjecture on the part of Lord Redesdale. In conclu sion, he would again remind their Lordships that, as they were all agreed that a great practical evil required to be remedied he conceived that if their Lordships were really disposed to remove that evil, they could not do so more effectually than , by the adoption of the present Bill. At all events, he hoped that their Lordships would agree to the second reading, an d allow it to go into Committee. The Duke of WELLINGTON said the Noble Viscount had disputed some of the arguments of his Noble and Learn e d Friend—that was to sa y , he had contradicted them ; and first of all, whether or not this chief justice as he was called, in the Court of Chancery, would be paid by the House of Com socno Viscount tulhda lead be d s f c o o u v n e d r e to d t h fi a l t l tmhoenosin; office. d n c e e x r t t , ai s n v hlyetthheer alloblenv peler there was one person at least who was qualified, who would accept the office.—(Laughter.) But he (the Noble Duke) fancied that the Noble Viscount would find himself mistaken upon that subject as be was upon many others.—( Cheers and Laughter.) But there was another position Which the Noble Viscount thought proper to dispute, and that was that so many persons after having, at different times, considered this scheme, had thought proper to object to it, and bad laid it aside altogether. His Noble and Learned Friend never stated that it was considered in 1813. What he stated was that the arguments used against the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor, applied to the prevention of the separation of the office of Lord Chancellor from the Chief Justice in Chancery. That the arguments then used and those now used, rested upon the same principle, and that Sir Samuel Remaly, Lord Redesdale, and Mr. Pitt had used these argu ments all in the same sense. He believed if the office of Lord Chancellor was separated from the office of Chief Justice in the Court of Chancery, it would soon become a mere political office, to the great detriment of the dignity of the first officer in their Lordship's HOUEC, and, above all, to the detriment of his Majesty's service. The LORD CHANCELLOR replied. The object of the Bill was not, as his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Lynd hurst) had contended, to separate the judicial from the political functions of the Lord Chancellor, but merely to take away from that officer those judicial duties which experience proved he had not time to perform. When his Noble and Learned Friend stated that the making the Lord Chancellor a judge only of appeals would be to degrade the office r and to render it difficult to obtain men of sufficient eminence to fill it, he (the Lord Chancellor) would only remark, in reply, that, since the year 1813, the Lord Chancellor had, in fact, been nothing more nor less than a judge of .appeals, and a judge of appeals only ; and yet he thought no man would con tend that, within that period, the office of Chancellor had not been filled by men of sufficient eminence. Then his Noble and Learned Friend contended that to preside in the Privy Council would he unworthy of the Lord Chancellor. Was it, indeed, unworthy of the highest legal officer under the Crown to preside in a Court where final decisions were given in all appeals from the colonies, and from the Ecclesiastical Courts? As it was admitted on all hands, even by the Noble and Learned Lord himself, that it was impossible for the Court of Chancery to go on in its present state, he thought that the Noble and Learned Lord ought to allow the Bill to go into Committee, when he would have the opportunity of making such alterations as he thought necessary, and of introducing such provisions as in his opinion would provide a remedy for a state of things which he admitted ought not to continue. Lord L YNDHUR ST, in explanation, stated that if he were to adopt the Noble and Learned Lord's suggestion, and to make such alterations as he thought expedient in com mittee, the Bill would then go down to the other House of Parliament not as the Government Bill, but as a Bill of his (Lord Lyndhurst's) own construction ; and in that case it would be easy to anticipate the result. He preferred, there therefore, to give his decided opposition to the measure on the second reading. The question was then put, and the House divided__ Contents Non-contents - 94 Majority against the Bill --63 The House adjourned at half-past eleven o'clock. POPULAR SABBATH AMUSEMENTS IN GHENT. The first excursion I made in the vicinity of Ghent was towards Deynse, about three leagues distance from that city, to the south-west, through a delightful country. The day on which I set out was Sunday ; and it was as fine a one as I could have wished for a journey. As I passed by the Stad-Huys, I read a placard on the wall, which stated that an entertainment long believed to have been abandoned in civilized communities was to take place that afternoon ; nothing less than a series of brutal exhibitions of animal and human strength and ferocity ; including a bull-bait, in which English dogs were to take a prominent part ; a bear-bait, by Luxembourg mastiffs ; a dog-fight, between a Newfoundland dog and a French mastiff from the South ; a man-fight ; a wrestle between a man and a bear ; and an attack, or assault by men, after the manner of the Spanish tnatadores, on a bull. I thought I would see it, though my nature revolted against the cruelty of the transaction ; and I did see it accordingly. It was held in a large yard or open space without the city, on my road, enclosed by high walls, around which a rude sort of am phitheatre was loosely and dangerously constructed. An imperfect fence divided the spectators from the arena. The place was crowded ; which led me to the conclusion that the lapse of ages had done little to soften the fierce charac ter of the men of Ghent ; and that though they might have many of the virtues of the social state, they wanted refinement, and exhibited a considerable lack of humanity. The spectators were by no means composed of the lower classes, though these predominated ; there was, on the contrary, a large sprinkling of well-dressed—l am glad I cannot say intelligent-looking men—among them ; and there were also some women, but they were apparently of the infe rior grade of society. The women grouped themselves as women isolated in crowds generally do ; and thus gave a sort of character to the otherwise repulsive scene. Covered for the most part by the black silk scarf thrown over their heads and shoulders, their large dark eyes glancing in the gloom of their general head-gear, and their comely counte nance exhibiting strong signs of excitement and interest in the sport, they might occasionally remind a man of the bull-fights in Spain, or the exhibitions of the Roman circus, of which these cruel sports are a barbaric remnant. It so occurred to me once or twice, especially in the last act (if I may so term it), the assault or rencontre between the bull and the matadors ; but the illusion was only momentary, and the romance was soon destroyed by the reality of Flemish coarseness and the phlegm of Low-Dutch excitement. The women seemed the most susceptible of emotion of all among the spectators, including men of every age, boys, and even children. I need not disgust my readers, lam sure, with a description of these brutalities ; and I have nothing to say of them beyond the mere recital of the cruelties practised towards the inferior animals. I found, however, that the bull-dog was not English, nor the Newfoundland-dog one of that noble race of animals ; and I afterwards discovered that the individuals who fought, and a majority of those who witnessed the proceedings as spectators, were among the very scum of the city, morally and physically. This barbarous entertainment lasted the entire of the Sunday afternoon ; and was, to their shame be it spoken, enacted under the surveillance and by the high permission of the police.—A Saunter in Belgium. The mock election for Mesopotamia—that far famed Island, which, notwithstanding the whirl of events in these fearful times, actually remains in the parish of Spring field, took place yesterday, when the Blue candidate was re turned by a majority of two. The chairing was conducted with the usual magnificence and pomp.—Essex Herald. SIZE OF THEATRES.—The followinr* sketch of n the dimensions of the principal Theatres in England and else where, is taken from the Report of the Dramatic Committee : From the curtain to Greatest breadth o the centre box. the pit. Drury-lane 6l feet 5O feet. Covent-garden - Haymarket 47 Italian Opera 9O Dublin 52 Tottenham-street St. Carlo, Naples Scala, Milan -. 90 Cirque Olympique B 6 Theatre des Varietes 52 Odeon 7l ..... ......... . 60 Feydcau 64 Theatre Francaise A woman named Dallas, about 60 years of age, whose husband is a gardner, residing in Rose-street in this town, was discovered yesterday evening burned to death in her own house. The deceased was addicted to drinking, and her husband bad left her in a state of intoxication, locking the door upon her. On his return he found her sitting on a chair dead, her clothes completely burned, and the body scorched and shrivelled in the roast dreadful manner. It is fortunate that the house was not destroyed.—lnverness Courier. EXTRAORDINARY FREAK.—Saturday morning, about two o'clock, as police constable Thornton, 53 E division, was going his rounds through Bloomsbury-square, his atten tion was arrested by a man of respectable appearance walking backwards and forwards. On proceeding towards him be per ceived two large pistols in his breast, and, on questioning him he said, in a strange tone of voice, " I am the King of the City, do not molest me." Thornton was about to secure him, when he ran away, but was overtaken and conveyed to the station-house. On searching him several documents were found on his person, and his relatives, who are merchants in the city, traced. The pistols were loaded, and on being asked what object he had in carrying them, he replied that he in tended shooting the Duke of Wellington. A messenger was despatched to his friends, who stated that the prisoner had lately been left an immense fortune, which had a most sericus effect upon his intellects, and there was no doubt but the tn. fortunate gentleman would have done injury to himsel or others had not Thornton apprehended him. 1.... _ .